"*We now have to take this fight to another level.”*

What's the level above saturation patrols?

"*officers from a private firm were preparing to deposit two bags of money in a bank when a silver coloured Japanese vehicle approached*"

This clearly calls for intelligence. This robber had inside information. Unless he just sits in the parking lot looking for a likely victim.

That marijuana is one of the first drugs people try when they're experimenting because it is widely considered to be safe. I think the last thing this country needs is a signal from the govt that dulling your mind is ok.

"But". They will do what they want.

Then claim they had no idea later.

I personally think people who go out in smaller boats beyond the buoy line are super human. Good to hear they were rescued

What's the source of the leak?

I'm not certain I've heard any party leader in opposition or ruling party, on assuming the seat, calling a press conference to announce "*y'all, we 200,000 in debt*". Individuals dont even do that. You quietly work to pay off what's outstanding and restore yourself to the black.

That should be easy enough to determine. Opening balance, revenue, expenses, closing balance.

"*no one would be stopped from running because of their financial status.*"

I havent resolved this issue in my own mind. Anyone who says that a seat in Parliament is not viewed by many who put their names forward as a gateway to riches is deaf and blind. It may be a fact that in reality only a few power brokers ever realize any bump in wealth while the pawns and those with true conviction just hear the sip sip about who get what. But Ive always thought that there is an inherent danger of putting a man *with lack* on top of a billion dollar pot of gold. But rich men steal too. And wouldnt it be discriminatory to exclude a talented individual or a man with conviction because they dont have the funds? I still battle with this. The answer is likely a truly transparent system that would tie sticky fingers of both rich and poor. But transparency appears to be a selective game ball. Alas we have a 25m contract for airport cargo handling to a gaming operator, no bid, approved by the cabinet/FS(?). Who told us a week ago(?) ~*transparency takes time, we getting there.*... while millions leak.

Having opening balance, revenue. expenses, closing balance of the ruling party doesnt seem like a bad idea

Isnt the entire trial about him paying money to silence her talking about the *sexcapade*?

We in trouble.

"*A woman also testified that before the shooting, Collins and his accomplices. Allegedly tried to kidnap her on Cowpen Road. She believed her assailants intended to rape so she screamed for help, scaring them away.*"

Is it normal to include that evidence? Seems weird. Does it have any bearing on whether a shooting miles away was justified?